Skip to main content

About your Search

20120930
20121008
STATION
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
MSNBC
Oct 5, 2012 12:00pm PDT
guest spot today. he chairs the political science department at vanderbilt university. how are you, sir? >> i'm fine. how are you? >> i'm good. i'm a person that believes that campaigns matter, that campaigning and governing are different jobs with different skill sets. can you talk about the impact of how campaigning is like governing and how campaigning is different than governing? >> there's certainly similari similariti similarities. when you're president of the united states, you need to do persuading. there are certain skill sets in common. one of the big differences when you campaign, you can be pretty vague and you can hedge. when you're governing, you have to make choices, and you've got to make decisions that have real policy implications. that's the big difference. >> can you name people who ran bad campaigns and were good presidents, and then people who ran good campaigns. >> i suspect the example of someone running a good campaign but not good as president might be lyndon johnson in '64. he ran a very powerful campaign and won 62%, 63% of the vote but didn't govern effectiv
MSNBC
Oct 2, 2012 3:00pm EDT
clean energy to space to stem-cell research to name a few. can science stay objective out of politics? alex is co-author of science left behind, feel good fallacies in the rise of the anti-scientific left. welcome. >> thank you for having me on. >> sure. you argue here that for all of the talk about republicans being the enemy of science, anti-scientific rhetoric is a by partisan project. tell me how you came to this opinion that democrats are not necessarily the party of science. >> well, on a whole host of issues, so as you know, on the right the conservatives are wrong on evolution and on climate change, and there's this it media narrative that somehow anti-science believes are unique to the right side of the political spectrum. what i found through reading a lot of science is basically that the left side also has some pet ideas not lining up with the scientific mainstream. for instance, opposition to genetic modification. the california democratic party endorsed this proportion to label food in direct opposition to the american medical association. the anti-vaccine moveme
MSNBC
Oct 8, 2012 12:00pm PDT
days. the conventional wisdom among the political science crowd is you don't have much variance between where the national horse race stands and where the race stands in the battleground states. if it moves nationally, it moves the same direction in the swing states. we see in this race closer polls nationally where obama will only be ahead by two points or whatever it is, and then you look at ohio and virginia and you see four or five, six, seven point margins. is there any imbalance between the two, and do you have any explanation for it? >> we don't have very many state polls back yet. the initial wave of state polls showed romney doing pretty well in the battleground states. in the rasmussen polls over the last two days, obama is doing better. that's consistent with the trend i talked about earlier. the question is whether obama gets an outsized bounce in states like ohio, nevada and iowa where he was doing better than nationally. if you look at all of the national polls conducted since the first debate, what you see is about a three point gain for romney. if that holds and if that
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)